Please note that the links to specific stories in this bulletin are
valid only until the website is next updated. If you can't find the story
you are looking for, go to www.bmts.com/~dibaudjimoh/page4.html
and scroll to the story you want.

1. UPDATE ON THE MEAFORD FISHING DISPUTE

In June 2000, the Chippewas of Nawash and the Chippewas of Saugeen (the
Saugeen Ojibway) signed a co-management Fishing Agreement with Ontario
(Ministry of Natural Resources) and Canada (Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada). The Agreement, among other things, sets out protocols for how
data will be exchanged between the Bands and the MNR, how total allowable
catches (TACs) will be calculated, and how breaches of the Agreement will
be dealt with.

In late December 2000, the MNR delivered its calculations for TACs to
the Band office (which was closed during the Christmas-New Year's break).
The MNR then proceeded to enforce its calculations for the area near Meaford
without giving the Band a chan ce to reply to its numbers, saying that
Nawash fishermen were fishing outside the boundaries of the territory
stated in the Agreement. The MNR confiscated Native-caught fish and ordered
fish-buyers to stop purchasing fish Native-caught from that area.

Confrontations on the Meaford dock between non-Natives (including a
non-Native commercial fishermen and some sportsfishermen) and Native fishermen
could have, but did not escalate. The Bands and the MNR have agreed to
meet to resolve their disagreemen t over the TAC for the area. The Bands
agreed to tell its fishermen to ensure they respected the western boundary
of the territory covered by the Agreement.

It is the Saugeen Ojibway's position that the protocols and meetings
established by the Fishing Agreement should be used to resolve all disputes
between the parties concerning managing the fishery - that is why the
Fishing Agreement was negotiated in the first place.

The Chippewas of Nawash recruited Dr. Stephen Crawford (currently a
professor of zoology at the Axelrod Institute of Ichthyology at the University
of Guelph) to help them establish a management plan based on science and
traditional knowledge of the fi shery around the Bruce Peninsula. Dr.
Crawford has successfully engaged researchers from other universities
in studying the fishery. Some of the fruit of those investigations are
beginning to show and Dr. Crawford and his colleagues presented 5 papers
at the Canadian Conference of Freshwater Fisheries Research (CCFFR) in
Toronto, January 2001.

Nawash and Dr. Crawford have extended invitations to the Ontario Ministry
of Natural Resources to take part in some of their studies, but MNR researchers
have, to date, not responded.

In keeping with two other Fishing Conferences (the first in 1995 and
the second in 1998) the 2001 Nawash Fishing Conference will cover a range
of significant issues relevant to fisheries managers and Native leaders
-- defining conservation, latest bio logical studies, political and legal
strategies, comparing situations, networking, establishing alliances.

5. UPDATE ON THE OFAH COURT CHALLENGE OF MNR'S BAN ON THE SPRING
BEAR HUNT

The Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters is continuing its bid
to overturn the Ministry of Natural Resources' ban of the Spring bear
hunt in Ontario. During the last round (in Superior Court) the OFAH's
lawyer, Tim Dansen, persuaded the judges to allow him to call Premier
Michael Harris and Natural Resources Minister John Snobelen to the stand
to testify. The OFAH is claiming that the ban was ordered in spite of
earlier expressions of support for the hunt by the Minister and that the
ban was politically motivated because of a successful animal rights lobby.

The OFAH will add another argument: that an Environmental Assessment
should have been done on the ban under Ontario's Environmental Assessment
Act, since the ban was not a conservation measure.

The OFAH will continue to argue that the ban threatens sportshunters
constitutionally protected freedom to express their heritage. For the
past several years (the early 1990s when Davison Ankney was President
of the OFAH) the organization has been lob bying against the recognition
of aboriginal and treaty rights. Members seem to be so annoyed that Native
rights are enshrined in the Constitution that the OFAH is prepared to
seek any avenue to ensure they have the same rights too. Premier Harris,
on ce an OFAH member and long a staunch supporter, has promised he will
introduce a Hunting and Fishing Heritage Act, so at least the Province
will recognize "sportsmen's rights", even if it can't enshrine them in
the Constitution.

The next round in the courts is scheduled for February 26-27th in Provincial
Court in Toronto. (The Court is located between Queen and Dundas Streets
on the east side of University Avenue). The Hunting and Fishing Heritage
Act is expected this Spring.

In spite of the constitutional and environmental questions it raises,
the government is not planning public hearings during its debate.

Nawash responds to confiscation of fish at Meaford, Ontario

In view of the heavy media coverage of recent events concerning our
fishing activities at Meaford, and in the light of the misguided comments
from some of the demonstrators at the Meaford dock, the Chiefs and Councils
of Nawash and Saugeen (collectively the Saugeen Ojibway), wish to clarify
a number of points:

The current dispute is over allocation - not conservation. Fish stocks
are not at risk from the Native harvest.

The Fishing Agreement signed by the two Bands, the Ontario Ministry
of Natural Resources (MNR) and the Canadian Department of Indian Affairs
in June 2000, contains protocols for setting mutually agreed TACs
(Total Allowable Catches) for each area in the traditional waters
of the Saugeen Ojibway covered by the Agreement. The MNR did not follow
the protocol in the Agreement when it set an unrealistically low TAC
for area 5-8 - the area near Meaford now at issue.

The Agreement also contains protocols for dealing with possible enforcement
action. The MNR did not follow the protocol of the Agreement when
it confiscated several thousands of dollars worth of fish from Native
fishermen on Friday, January 5.

Our fishermen have withdrawn from any areas that might be construed
as being east of the boundary of the Band's traditional waters as
defined in the Agreement.

The two Chiefs offered to meet with the MNR to resolve the dispute
as early as Saturday, January 6 if the MNR agreed to follow the protocols
in the Agreement. Instead, the MNR ordered local fish buyers to cease
purchasing Native-caught fish and confiscated over a of tonne of fish
caught by two Native tugs.

"Had the MNR employed the protocols we had agreed to for resolving TACs
and enforcement issues, we most likely could have avoided the unfortunate
conflict at the Meaford dock," said Chief Akiwenzie.

Chief Randy Roote: "We feel the Agreement should be used in all disputes
involving our fishery - we and the MNR spent a lot of time hammering it
out, so let's use it. Obviously we're going to have differences. These
kinds of things are going to happen. We must not return to the old way
of confrontation, charges, and court."

The two Bands are continuing their assessments of their fishermen's
catches (a program started almost as soon as the Jones-Nadjiwon court
decision was rendered in 1993). They have expanded their assessments to
research projects, many of which are being done in partnership with staff
from the Universities of Toronto, Guelph, Laval and McGill.

Background to the Saugeen Ojibway Fishery

The road to the Fishing Agreement signed by the Chippewas of Nawash,
Chippewas of Saugeen, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Indian
and Northern Affairs Canada in June 2000 took a long time and a lot of
hard work. It must be remembered that when First Nations' peoples address
an issue, we do so with two or three centuries of history in mind. So
it is

with the Mi'kmaq and their fishing rights. So it is with us. The objections
of some that the Supreme Court of Canada is handing rights to a few at
the expense of many, or that government is allocating resources based
on racial criteria (ie, to Natives rather than non-Natives) is hardly
credible for us who have lived so long separated from our lands and waters
- our resources and economies - by real racist acts and policies. Acts
and policies now recognized and identified as such by history, the United
Nations, and, thank goodness, by most intelligent Canadians.

A Chronology

Before contact with the Europeans, the culture and economy of the Chippewas
of Nawash and the Chippewas of Saugeen (the Saugeen Ojibway) were inextricably
tied to their fisheries around the Bruce Peninsula. There is archaeological
evidence of trade of fish for goods such as corn from other First Nations.

In 1847, the Saugeen Ojibway, fearful of the ever-aggressive encroachment
of European settlers, traders and fishing fleets, petitioned Queen Victoria
for a declaration that they owned the Bruce Peninsula and the waters and
islands around it. This was granted. Nevertheless, the First Nations of
the Bruce Peninsula were squeezed out of their own fishery by the aggressive
fishing of US and English commercial operations and the laissez-faire
policies of Canada.

By the end of the 19th Century the sturgeon was all but extinct. By
the 1950s lake trout stocks had crashed in Lake Huron and Georgian Bay.
The Native fishery was virtually non-existent.

In the 1980s, the Ministry of Natural Resources adopted a quota system
to control the increased fishing pressure of large commercial operations.
The Chippewas of Nawash fishery was assigned a totally inadequate quota
and restricted to a tiny area off the Nawash reserve at Cape Croker. Their
share of the commercial harvest was less than 1%.

In June 1993, Judge David Fairgrieve handed down his decision in Jones-Nadjiwon.
He found that the two Bands had an aboriginal and treaty right to fish
for trade and commerce. He further found that Ontario's quota system had
discriminated against the two Bands and violated their Constitutional
rights.

Soon after the decision, Nawash began to scientifically assess its fishermen
's catches and to evaluate the MNR's management of the commercial fisheries.
The Bands' assessment has now broadened to included research partnerships
with several universities. They presented several papers at a recent national
fisheries conference held in Toronto, Ontario.

During the summer of 1995 a growing backlash against the decision and
the Bands' determination to practice their rights culminated in the vandalism
of Native fishing boats (one was burned on Labour Day weekend), the theft
of Native nets from the waters where they were set, and attacks on Native
people in Owen Sound and Southampton.

In June 2000, seven years after the Jones-Nadjiwon decision, the Bands
singed a Fishing Agreement with Canada and Ontario. The Agreement sets
out protocols by which the partners will arrive at Total Allowable Catches
(TACs) that are conservationally sound. Protocols were established for
dealing with issues that might require enforcement by the Band or by the
MNR. It was agreed the parties would exchange information each had on
the fishery to better manage the fishery together.